Die ÖZS wird von Springer veröffentlicht. Entsprechend müssen Autor:innen alle Beiträge über die Homepage der ÖZS bei Springer einreichen:  https://link.springer.com/journal/11614

Astrid Pennerstorfer (Astrid.Pennerstorfer@wu.ac.at) steht als Editor-in-Charge für Anfragen zur Verfügung!

Beitragstypen in der ÖZS (in English)

Original Articles

Original articles are long-form articles in which authors discuss theoretical, empirical, and methodological issues in sociology. They can be empirical studies, systematic reviews, or theory-developing contributions. Original articles are expected to have a clearly defined research question.
Article manuscripts are expected to be original contributions, with a range between 40.000 and 70.000 characters. The number of characters includes footnotes, references, tables, and spaces, but not abstracts or supplements (e.g., interview guides, program code, accessibility information).
Each article is assigned to a member of the editorial team who conducts initial scope and quality checks. If issues are identified, the corresponding authors will be informed, and further steps will be discussed. If no issues are identified, two anonymous reviewers are contacted to provide independent evaluations of the submitted texts. If both reviewers conclude that the article can be published, the handling editor will suggest that the editor in charge publish the contribution. The editor in charge may reject a publication at any time if concerns regarding, e.g., scientific integrity or data protection are raised. If the reviewers do not endorse an article for publication, the handling editor will suggest to the authors how to proceed based on the feedback provided by the reviewers. If reviewers state opposing views on the quality of the paper, the editorial team is free to recruit additional reviewers before accepting or rejecting an original article.
Key review criteria for evaluating original articles are: (1) Do the authors introduce a clear research question? (2) Does the contribution cover the relevant literature adequately and in an unbiased manner? (3) For empirical contributions only: Are the used methods valid and correctly applied? (4) For quantitative empirical contributions only: Are the methods sufficiently documented for replication studies? (5) Are the presented conclusions in line with the presented literature and analysis?
All articles need to adhere the expected ethical standards of social science research and the standards of SPRINGER. The material has to be formatted in accordance with the formatting guidelines stated on this homepage, and all the materials need to be provided in the stated formats. The Authors are expected to proof-read and edit their manuscripts before submission.

Reports

Reports include a variety of shorter publication formats, published in the corresponding collections. These are:
Project Reports: Project reports are short summaries of concluded research projects. They offer insight into the key research questions, methods, and outcomes. This type of report should focus on specific, descriptive outcomes of research projects and less on testing or developing theories or models. This type of publication offers researchers the chance to present the framework of research projects and key results in a concise manner.
Key review criteria for project reports are: (1) Is the purpose of the study illustrated with enough detail? (2) Is the research design presented in a transparent manner and fitting for the stated purpose? (3) Are the results presented in a transparent manner, and are there enough details to allow for replication?
Data, Software or Infrastructure Reports: Reports in this category are short introductions to new datasets, software solutions, or research infrastructure. Contributions may describe a new dataset and provide insights into its reuse potential, may describe an introduction or review of a software package that may be used for sociological applications (e.g., useful for quantitative or qualitative data collection, processing or analysis), or may describe services that specific research infrastructures are offering. The aim of this type of publication is to foster knowledge about current trends in the sociological community. All data sets, software packages, and infrastructure services described must be useable at the time of submission. Prototypes and beta-versions are fine as long as readers may access and use them. Commercial products may only be discussed in this category if they allow for free academic use in studies and research.
Key review criteria for data, software and infrastructure reports: (1) Does the report illustrate the related purpose and sociological use cases? (2) Is there sufficient information to allow readers to use the data, software, or infrastructure after reading the report?

Workshop reports: Workshop reports are texts that give insight into specific – either new or established – data collection methods or data analysis techniques. Workshop reports may be based on ongoing or completed projects. Any research data, including simulated data, may be used for illustrative purposes. However, the origin of data has to be stated clearly, and replication materials must be provided to the editorial team and external reviewers. The aim of this type of report is to give insights into state-of-the-art data collection and analysis methods, providing other scholars with new insights for their own research and teaching.
Key review criteria for workshop reports are: (1) Is the presented method relevant to sociological research? (2) Is there sufficient information for readers to understand and apply the method to their own research? (3) Are materials provided to readers that allow for replication of the presented methods and outcomes?

Research in Brief: Reports in this category will be short follow-ups to previously published articles, adding new or updated insights. This type of publication is meant to allow scholars who conduct longitudinal or panel research to update their findings or researchers who replicated a previous study to share their insights. This format is only suitable for projects with contributions already available / published, as it follows up on originally published papers. The original papers need not be published with ÖZS but are expected to be available to reviewers.
Key review criteria for this type of contribution are: (1) Is there a substantial contribution to the previously published materials? (2) Is there a substantial need to update the previous findings?
All manuscripts that should be considered for the “Reports”-section are expected to be original contributions, with a suggested length of 30.000 characters. For this type of contribution, a minimum of 20.000 characters is necessary, and the maximum of allowed characters is 40.000. The number of characters includes footnotes, references, tables and spaces, but not abstracts or supplements (e.g., interview guides, program code, accessibility information).
Each report is assigned to a member of the editorial team. These conduct initial scope and quality checks. If issues are identified, the corresponding authors will be informed, and further steps will be discussed. If no issues are identified, one additional anonymous reviewer is contacted to provide an independent evaluation of the submitted text. If the reviewer concludes that the article can be published, the handling editor will suggest that the editor in charge publish the contribution. The editor in charge may reject a publication at any time if concerns regarding, e.g., scientific integrity or data protection are raised. If a reviewer does not endorse an article for publication, the handling editor will suggest to the authors how to proceed based on the feedback provided by the reviewer. The editorial team can recruit additional reviewers before accepting or rejecting a report.
Reports may also be assigned to a corresponding topical collection as well. All articles need to adhere the expected ethical standards of social science research and the standards of SPRINGER. The material has to be formatted in accordance with the formatting guidelines stated on this homepage, and all the materials need to be provided in the stated formats. The Authors are expected to proof-read and edit their manuscripts before submission.

Editorials (reviewed and non-reviewed)

Guest editors for topical collections are expected to provide an editorial, with two potential options available. The first is a short paper that introduces the articles found in the collection and explains why the collection was created. These editorials are not reviewed and may be presented on the front page of a collection and do not have to be submitted via SNAPP.
The second option is that guest editors provide a peer-reviewed editorial, that is submitted via SNAPP. These types of editorials need to include an outline of why the research topic featured is of interest, an overview of central themes dealing with this type of research, and a structured review of key assumptions that define the topic of the collection. These editorials are reviewed by a member of the editorial board of the ÖZS other than the editor who handles the topical collection. If the reviewer concludes that the article can be published, the handling editor will suggest that the editor in charge publishes the contribution. The editor in charge may reject a publication at any time if concerns regarding, e.g., scientific integrity or data protection are raised. If a reviewer does not endorse an article for publication, the handling editor will suggest to the authors how to proceed based on the feedback provided by the reviewer.

Book Review

The book review editor welcomes proposals for book reviews (max. 12.000 characters). However, books that are reviewed need to focus on Austria or be written by authors with an Austrian affiliation. The book review editor may reject a book review at any given time based on the quality of the writing or scientific rigor.

Conference Report

The ÖZS only publishes conference reports by invited authors. Unsolicited submissions will not be accepted.

Redaktionelles Vorgehen der ÖZS bei Beitragseinreichung (in English)

Double-blind peer review

This journal follows a double-blind reviewing procedure. This means the author will remain anonymous to the reviewers throughout peer review. It is the author’s responsibility to anonymize the manuscript and any associated materials.
Author names, affiliations, and any other potentially identifying information should be removed from the manuscript text and any accompanying files (such as figures of supplementary material).
A separate Title Page should be submitted, containing the corresponding author’s title, author names, affiliations, and contact information. This page should also include any acknowledgements, disclosures, or funding information.
Authors should avoid citing their own work in a way that could reveal their identity.
This journal also publishes special/guest-edited collections. The peer review process for these articles is the same as that of the journal in general. Additionally, if a guest editor authors an article in their collection, the peer review process will be organized by a member of the core editorial team.
Each manuscript is assigned to an editorial board member responsible for the review process. This handling editor appoints two external peer reviewers for original articles or one external peer reviewer for reports. External peer reviewers receive the manuscript anonymously and provide feedback on the reviews to the author. If the reviewers suggest revising a manuscript, the revised text is subjected to a second review by the same reviewers. If there are conflicting opinions among the reviewers or reviews do not meet the expected quality, another review can be obtained. The final decision on publication is made based on these reviews and has to be coordinated with the editor in charge. Topical collections by guest editors are subject to the same peer review guidelines. If members of the editorial board, the editor-in-chief or the editor-in-charge submit a contribution, the editor-in-charge (or editor-in-chief) has to appoint an editorial team member to manage the article. The identity of this handling editor is only known to the editor-in-charge and editor-in-chief and will not be disclosed to any other members of the editorial board.

Manuscript Submission

Submission of a manuscript implies that the work has not been published before; that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere; that its publication has been approved by all co-authors, if any, as well as by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – at the institute where the work has been carried out. The publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any compensation claims.

Permissions

Authors wishing to include figures, tables, or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright owner(s) for both the print and online format and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the authors.